[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 30, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55889-55894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-27607]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IN65-1-7288a; FRL-5613-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On November 21, 1995, and February 14, 1996 the State of 
Indiana submitted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request to 
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishing regulations for 
wood furniture coating operations in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter 
Counties, as part of Clark and Floyd Counties' 15 percent (%) Rate-of-
Progress (ROP) plan control measures for Volatile Organic Compound 
(VOC) emissions, and the State's requirement to develop post-1990 
Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) rules for the four counties. These regulations 
require wood furniture coating facilities which have the potential to 
emit at least 25 tons of VOC per year to use coatings which meet a 
certain VOC content limit or add on controls that are capable of 
achieving an equivalent reduction. The rule also specifies work 
practices and training requirements that must be implemented for the 
wood working operations. Indiana expects that this rule will reduce VOC 
emissions by approximately 2,445 pounds per day in Clark and Floyd 
Counties. No wood furniture coating operations have been identified in 
Lake or Porter Counties at this time.

DATES: This action is effective on December 30, 1996, unless EPA 
receives adverse or critical comments by November 29, 1996. If the 
effective date is delayed, timely notification will be published in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request are available for inspection 
at the following address: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 
Air and Radiation Division, Air Programs Branch, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you 
telephone Francisco J. Acevedo at (312) 886-6082 before visiting the 
Region 5 Office.)
    Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco J. Acevedo at (312) 886-
6061.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 182(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (the Act) requires all ozone 
nonattainment areas which are classified as ``moderate'' or worse to 
achieve a 15% reduction of 1990 emissions of VOC by 1996. In Indiana, 
Lake and Porter Counties are classified as ``severe'' nonattainment for 
ozone, while Clark and Floyd Counties are classified as ``moderate'' 
nonattainment. As such, these areas are subject to the 15% ROP 
requirement. Section 182(b)(2)(A) of the Act further requires States 
with moderate or worse ozone nonattainment areas to submit a SIP 
revision establishing RACT requirements for each source category 
covered by a CTG issued by EPA between November 15, 1990, and the date 
of area attainment. Under this provision, the State must submit these 
SIP revisions within the period established in the relevant CTG 
document. Section 183 of the Act required that EPA publish CTG 
documents for thirteen source categories not already covered by a CTG 
by November 15, 1993.
    On April 28, 1992, the EPA published a supplement to the General 
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 1990 Amendments to 
the Act (57 FR 18069), which listed 13 source categories to be covered 
by a post-enactment CTG document. One of these source categories is 
wood furniture coating. This supplemental document also noted that the 
EPA would not be able to publish all CTGs required by the Act by the 
November 15, 1993 deadline, and therefore states may delay adoption of 
RACT rules for forthcoming CTG source categories. However, it specifies 
that if the CTGs are not completed on time, the states are to develop 
and submit RACT rules for these categories by November 15, 1994. After 
an extensive regulatory negotiation with industry, EPA issued a draft 
CTG for wood furniture coating in August, 1995 which was released on 
May 20, 1996 as a final CTG. As part of the final CTG, a model rule for 
wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations was also released.
    The emission points covered in the CTG are the finishing, cleaning, 
and washoff operations. The finishing operation includes the finishing 
application area, flashoff areas, curing ovens, and assorted cooldown 
zones. Emissions can occur throughout the entire finishing operation. 
Finishing operation-related cleaning includes application equipment 
cleanup, process equipment cleaning, and spray booth cleaning. Cleaning 
operations occur primarily in the application area, though 
miscellaneous cleaning operations may occur along any part of the 
finishing operation. Washoff operations are also covered by the model 
rule. Washoff includes the removal of finishing material from a piece 
of furniture that does not meet specifications.
    The selected RACT contains two elements: emission standards 
limiting the VOC content of coatings and work practice standards. The 
VOC content should be calculated as applied to account for in-house 
dilution of coatings purchased from an outside source. To incorporate 
some flexibility, the model

[[Page 55890]]

rule allows sources to use either an averaging approach or add-on air 
pollution control equipment to meet the RACT requirements. To use an 
add-on control device, the source must demonstrate, through the use of 
a series of calculations, that the source is achieving an emission 
reduction equivalent to that achieved by sources using compliant 
coatings.
    Sources using an averaging approach must demonstrate that their 
emissions are no greater than 90 percent of the emissions that would 
result from the use of compliant coatings. Section B.4(a)(4) of the 
model rule provides guidance on how to determine if the source is 
achieving the required emission reduction. The model rule contains 
extensive guidance for states which decide to allow averaging as a 
method of demonstrating compliance. However, states have the option of 
not incorporating an averaging mechanism into their rules. States may 
also place limitations on the averaging program if they wish to do so. 
For example, a state may limit averaging to facilities of a certain 
size, limit the number of coatings subject to averaging, or limit the 
amount of time a source could use averaging in anticipation that, in 
the future, compliant coatings may be available for every situation.
    The baseline for each finishing material included in the averaging 
program shall be the lower of the actual or allowable emission rate as 
of the effective date of the State's RACT rule. For example, assuming a 
limit of 0.8 lb VOC/lb solids, if a source is already using a 0.3 lb 
VOC/lb solids topcoat, it is not entitled to any sort of credit for the 
0.5 lb VOC/lb solids difference. Methods used in determining the usage 
of each finishing material shall be accurate enough to ensure that the 
affected source's actual emissions are less than the allowable 
emissions.
    On May 3, 1995, the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board (IAPCB) 
adopted the Wood Furniture Coatings rule. Public hearings on the rule 
were held on March 1, 1995, and May 3, 1995, in Indianapolis, Indiana. 
The rule was signed by the Secretary of State on December 5, 1995, and 
became effective on January 4, 1996; it was published in the Indiana 
Register on February 1, 1996. Indiana Department of Environmental 
Management (IDEM) formally submitted the Wood Furniture Coatings rule 
to EPA on November 21, 1995, as a revision to the Indiana SIP for 
ozone; supplemental documentation to this revision was submitted on 
February 14, 1996. EPA made a finding of completeness in a letter dated 
February 23, 1996.

II. Analysis of State Submittal

    The submittals include the following new or revised rules:

326  Indiana Air Code (IAC) 8-11 Wood Furniture Coatings

    In order to determine the approvability of the Indiana Wood 
Furniture Coating SIP revision, the State rule was reviewed for 
enforceability and consistency with the model rule found in the draft 
and final CTG for Wood Furniture Coating. A discussion of the rule and 
EPA's analysis follows:

8-11-1  Applicability

    This section establishes which facilities are subject to the 
Indiana wood furniture coating rules. Subject facilities include all 
sources in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties which have the 
potential to emit at least 25 tons of VOC per year and are classified 
under any of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 
codes: 2434 (wood cabinets), 2511 (wood household furniture, including 
tables, beds, chairs, and unupholstered sofas), 2512 (upholstered wood 
household furniture), 2517 (wood television, radios, phonographs, and 
sewing machine cabinets), 2519 (household furniture, not elsewhere 
classified), 2521 (wood office furniture), 2531 (public building and 
related furniture), 2541 (wood office and store fixtures, partitions, 
shelving, and lockers), 2599 (furniture and fixtures and any other 
coated furnishings made of solid wood, wood composition, or simulated 
wood material not elsewhere classified). The applicability section of 
the Indiana rule is generally consistent with EPA's model rule for wood 
furniture finishing and cleaning operations and is therefore 
approvable.

8-11-2  Definitions

    This section establishes definitions for 42 terms used throughout 
the State rule. The definitions section of the Indiana rule accurately 
describes the specified terms and is generally consistent with EPA's 
model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations. The 
Indiana rule does not define additional terms found in the model rule 
that are also used in the State rule. However, the lack of these 
definitions does not appear to create a conflict in the rule nor does 
it weaken the interpretation of the rule. This section is therefore 
approvable.

8-11-3  Emission Limits

    This section requires that on or after January 1, 1996, each 
facility subject to the rule must limit VOC emissions from finishing 
operations by complying with one of the following options: (1) Using 
as-applied topcoats with a VOC content limit of 0.8 kg VOC/kg solids 
(0.8 lb VOC/lb solids); (2) Using a finishing system of sealers with a 
VOC content limit of 1.9 kg VOC/kg solids (1.9 lb VOC/lb solids), as 
applied and topcoats with a VOC content limit of 1.8 kg VOC/kg solids 
(1.8 lb VOC/lb solids), as applied; (3a) For sources using acid-cured 
alkyd amino vinyl sealers and acid-cured alkyd amino conversion varnish 
topcoats the sealer is to contain no more than 2.3 kg VOC/kg solids 
(2.3 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied, and the topcoat no more than 2.0 kg 
VOC/kg solids (2.0 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied; (3b) For sources 
using a sealer other than an acid-cured alkyd amino vinyl sealer and 
acid-cured amino conversion varnish topcoats, the sealer is to contain 
no more than 1.9 kg VOC/kg solids (1.9 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied, 
and the topcoat is to contain no more than 2.0 kg VOC/kg solids (2.0 lb 
VOC/lb solids), as applied; (3c) For sources using an acid-cured alkyd 
amino vinyl sealer and a topcoat other than an acid-cured alkyd amino 
conversion varnish topcoat, the sealer is to contain no more than 2.3 
kg VOC/kg solids (2.3 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied, and the topcoat is 
to contain no more than 1.8 kg VOC/kg solids (1.8 lb VOC/lb solids), as 
applied.
    As an alterative to meeting these coating limits, the rule allows 
regulated sources to use either a control system that achieves an 
equivalent reduction in emissions as calculated using specified 
compliance procedures in section 6(a)(2) of the rule, or an emissions 
averaging approach which must demonstrate that emissions reductions 
from the finishing materials are at least 10% greater than would be 
achieved by use of compliant coatings to meet the coating limits. 
Section 3(a)(4) establishes the equations, based upon those developed 
in the CTG's model rule, to demonstrate compliance with the rule 
through emissions averaging, and sources using an averaging approach 
must meet additional requirements as provided for in section 10.
    To limit VOC emissions from cleaning operations, section 3(b) 
requires that wood furniture coating facilities meet a VOC content 
limit of 0.8 kg VOC/kg solids (0.8 lb VOC/lb solids), for strippable 
booth coatings, as applied. The emission limits section of the Indiana 
rule follows the approach recommended in the EPA model rule and is 
therefore approvable.

8-11-4  Work Practice Standards

    This section requires that certain work practices be followed. On 
or after

[[Page 55891]]

July 23, 1995, all equipment is to be maintained according to the 
manufacturer's specifications; all fresh or used solvent must be kept 
in closed containers; all organic solvents used for line cleaning must 
be pumped or drained into a closed container; and all finishing 
materials and cleaning materials must also be stored in closed 
containers. In addition, closed tanks are required to be used for 
washoff operations, and during washoff operations dripping of 
components must be minimized by tilting or rotating the part to drain 
as much organic solvent as possible. Further, sources are not to use 
organic solvents containing more than 8% by weight of VOC for cleaning 
spray booth components other than conveyors, continuous coaters and 
their enclosures, or metal filters, except during refurbishing of the 
spray booth. If the spray booth is being refurbished, that is, the 
spray booth coating or material used to cover the booth is being 
replaced, no more than 1 gallon of organic solvent shall be used to 
clean the booth. Conventional air spray guns are prohibited under the 
rule except under certain circumstances specified under section 4(c).
    On or after May 1, 1996, wood furniture coating operations must 
clean spray guns using an enclosed device which minimizes solvent 
evaporation, recirculates solvent for reuse, and collects solvent for 
proper disposal or recycling. Sources must also implement a written 
leak inspection and maintenance plan which meets criteria specified in 
section 4(g). A cleaning and washoff solvent accounting system must be 
implemented, by means of maintaining forms that record the quantity and 
type of organic solvent used each month for washoff and cleaning, the 
number of pieces washed off, and the reason for the washoff, and the 
quantity of spent solvent generated from each activity that is recycled 
on-site or disposed off-site each month. Finally, sources must 
implement a written and hands-on annual training program which at a 
minimum will cover applicable application techniques, cleaning 
procedures, equipment setup and adjustment to minimize finishing 
material usage and overspray, and management of clean-up wastes. 
Records of such training programs shall be kept on-site for at least 
three years. The work practice standards section is consistent with 
EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations 
and is therefore approvable.

8-11-5  Continuous Compliance Plan

    This section requires that on or before May 1, 1996, each owner or 
operator of a subject facility must submit to IDEM a continuous 
compliance plan (CCP) which shall address, at a minimum, the work 
practice requirements specified in section 4 of the rule. Further, the 
CCP should include a statement signed by a responsible official 
certifying that the facility is in compliance with the control 
requirements of section 3 and the work practice standards of section 4. 
A copy of the CCP shall be maintained on site and shall be available 
for inspection. If IDEM determines the CCP is inadequate, IDEM shall 
require the CCP to be modified appropriately. The continuous compliance 
plan section is consistent with EPA's model rule for wood furniture 
finishing and cleaning operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-6  Compliance Procedures and Monitoring Requirements

    This section requires sources subject to the emission limits in the 
State rule to demonstrate compliance with those limits by using any of 
the following methods: (1) To support that each sealer, topcoat, and 
strippable booth coating meets the requirements of the emission limits 
section, the sources are required to maintain documentation that uses 
EPA Method 24 data, or data from an equivalent method, to determine the 
VOC and solids content of the as-supplied finished material. If 
solvents or other VOC are added to the finishing material before 
application, the source is required to maintain documentation showing 
the VOC content of the finishing material as-applied, in kilograms of 
VOC per kilograms of solids. (2) To comply through the use of a control 
system, sources are required to determine the overall control 
efficiency needed to demonstrate compliance using the overall control 
efficiency equation provided in the rule for the specific capture 
system and control devices employed by the source. Sources are also 
required to document that the actual or daily weighted average VOC 
content used in the overall control efficiency equation is obtained 
from the VOC and solids content of the as-applied finishing material. 
In addition, sources will need to calculate the overall efficiency of 
the capture system and control device, using the procedures described 
in the test procedures section of the rule, and demonstrate that the 
value of the overall control efficiency thus estimated is equal or 
greater than the value of the overall control efficiency calculated by 
the overall control efficiency equation.
    Initial compliance with the rule is to be met as follows. (1) 
Sources subject to the provisions of section 3(a)(1) through 3(a)(3) or 
3(b) which are complying through the procedures established in section 
6(a)(1) are to submit an initial compliance status report, as required 
by the continuous compliance plan and reporting requirements sections 
of the rule, stating that compliant sealers and topcoats and strippable 
booth coatings are being used in the wood furniture manufacturing 
operations. (2) Sources subject to the coating limit provisions of 
section 3 that are complying through the procedures established in 
subsection (a)(1) and are applying sealers and topcoats using 
continuous coaters are required to demonstrate initial compliance by 
either of the following two options: (a) By submitting an initial 
compliance status report stating that compliant sealers and topcoats, 
as determined by the VOC content of the finishing material in the 
reservoir and the VOC content as calculated from records, are being 
used; or (b) By submitting an initial compliance status report stating 
that compliant sealers or topcoats, as determined by the VOC content of 
the finishing material in the reservoir, are being used and the 
viscosity of the finishing material in the reservoir is being 
monitored. The source is also required to provide data that demonstrate 
the correlation between viscosity of the finishing material and the VOC 
content of the finishing material in the reservoir. (3) Sources using a 
control system or capture or control device to comply with the 
requirements of this rule, as allowed in the emission limits section of 
the State rule and subsection (a)(2), are required to demonstrate 
initial compliance by doing the following on or before January 1, 1996: 
Conducting an initial compliance test using the procedures and test 
methods listed in the test procedures section of the rule; calculating 
the overall control efficiency; determining those operating conditions 
critical to determining compliance and establishing operating 
parameters that will ensure compliance with the standards; and 
submitting a monitoring plan that identifies the operating parameter to 
be monitored for the capture device and discusses why the parameter is 
appropriate for demonstrating ongoing compliance. In addition, this 
subsection requires sources complying with this subsection to calculate 
the site-specific operating parameter value as the arithmetic average 
of the maximum or minimum operating parameter values, as appropriate, 
that demonstrate compliance with the standards, during the initial 
compliance test required in subsection (c)(3)(A)(iv) of the rule. (4)

[[Page 55892]]

This section also states that sources subject to the CCP requirements 
of the rule are required to submit an initial compliance status report, 
as required by the reporting requirements section of the rule, stating 
that the CCP has been developed and procedures have been established 
for implementing the provisions of the plan.
    The Indiana rule states that continuous compliance must be 
demonstrated as follows: (1) Sources that are complying through the 
procedures established in subsection (a)(1) shall demonstrate 
continuous compliance by using compliant materials, maintaining records 
that demonstrate the finishing materials are compliant, and submitting 
a compliance certification with the semiannual report required by 
section 9(c) of this rule. (2) Sources that are complying through the 
procedures established in subsection (a)(1) and are applying sealers 
and topcoats using continuous coaters shall demonstrate continuous 
compliance by use of the following procedures: (A) Using compliant 
materials, as determined by the VOC content of the finishing material 
in the reservoir and the VOC content as calculated from records, and 
submitting a compliance certification with the semiannual report 
required by section 9(c) of the rule; (B) Using compliant materials, as 
determined by the VOC content of the finishing material in the 
reservoir, maintaining a viscosity of the finishing material in the 
reservoir that is no less than the viscosity of the initial finishing 
material by monitoring the viscosity with a viscosity meter or by 
testing the viscosity of the initial finishing material and retesting 
the material in the reservoir each time solvent is added, maintaining 
records of solvent additions, and submitting a compliance certification 
with the semiannual report required by section 9(c) of the rule. (3) 
Sources that are complying through the use of a control system or a 
capture or control device are required to demonstrate continuous 
compliance by complying with the control system operation, maintenance, 
and testing, and control system monitoring, record keeping, and 
reporting requirements stated in this section of the rule. (4) Sources 
subject to the continuous compliance plan requirements in section 5 are 
required to demonstrate continuous compliance by following the 
provisions of the CCP and submitting a compliance certification with 
the semiannual report required by the reporting requirements section of 
the rule. The compliance procedures and monitoring requirements section 
is consistent with EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and 
cleaning operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-7  Test Procedures

    This section provides that compliance with the rule's emission 
coating limits will be determined by the procedures and methods 
contained in 326 IAC 8-1-4 and 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. The former 
contains the State's testing provisions, while the latter contains 
EPA's Method 24. If it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of IDEM and 
EPA that a finishing material does not release VOC by-products during 
the cure, (for example, all VOC is solvent), then batch formulation 
information shall be accepted. In the event of any inconsistency 
between an EPA Method 24 test and a facility's formulation data, that 
is, if the EPA Method 24 value is higher, the EPA Method 24 shall 
govern. Compliance through the use of a control system shall be 
demonstrated initially by demonstrating that the overall control 
efficiency determined by using procedures in 326 IAC 8-1-4 and 40 CFR 
60, Appendix A is at least equal to the required overall control 
efficiency determined by using the equation in section 6(a)(2)(A). All 
tests required in this section are to be conducted according to the 
protocol developed in consultation with IDEM. The test procedures 
section is consistent with EPA's model rule for wood furniture 
finishing and cleaning operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-8  Record Keeping Requirements

    This section requires that the owner or operator of a source 
subject to the Indiana rule maintain the following records as part of 
this program: A list of each of the finishing material and strippable 
booth coating subject to the emission limits of the rule; the VOC and 
solids content, as applied, of each finishing material and strippable 
booth coating subject to the emission limits of the rule; and copies of 
data sheets documenting how the as-applied values were determined.
    In addition, the owner or operator of a Source following the 
compliance procedures of section 6(c)(2) shall maintain records 
required by subsection (a), viscosity measurements, and daily records 
of solvent and finishing material additions to the continuous coater 
reservoir. Sources following the compliance method of section 6(a)(2) 
in addition to complying with the record keeping requirements of 
section 6(c)(3)(B) shall maintain the following records: Copies of the 
calculations to support the equivalency of using a control system, as 
well as the data necessary to support the calculation of the required 
overall efficiency and actual determined control efficiency; and 
records of the daily average value of each continuously monitored 
parameter for each operating day.
    Sources subject to the work practice standards in section 4 of the 
State rule are to maintain on-site the CCP and all records associated 
with fulfilling the requirements of that plan, including, but not 
limited to the following: Records demonstrating compliance with the 
operator training program; records maintained in accordance with the 
leak inspection and maintenance plan; records associated with cleaning 
solvent accounting system; records associated with the limitation on 
the use of conventional air spray guns showing total finishing material 
usage and the percentage of finishing materials applied with 
conventional air spray guns for each semiannual reporting period; 
records showing the VOC content of solvent used for cleaning booth 
components, except for solvent used to clean conveyors, continuous 
coaters and their enclosures, or metal filters; and copies of logs and 
other documentation developed to demonstrate that the other provisions 
of the CCP are followed. All records under this rule are to be 
maintained for a minimum period of three years. Failure to maintain the 
records constitutes a violation of the rule for each day records are 
not maintained. The record keeping requirements section is consistent 
with EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning 
operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-9  Reporting Requirements

    On or before May 1, 1996, owners or operators of wood furniture 
manufacturing operation are to submit the following information to 
IDEM: the continuous compliance plan required by section 5 of the State 
rule and the initial compliance report for sources using add-on 
controls as required by section 6(b)(3) of the rule. Sources 
demonstrating compliance in accordance with section 6(a)(1) or 6(a)(2) 
of the rule are to submit a semiannual report covering the previous six 
months of operation. The first report is to be submitted 30 calendar 
days after the end of the first six (6) month period following the 
compliance date. Subsequent reports are to be submitted within 30 
calendar days after the end of each six month period following the 
first report. Each semiannual report shall include: the information 
required by section 6(c); a statement of whether the operation was in 
compliance or noncompliance; and if the operation

[[Page 55893]]

was not in compliance, the measures taken to bring the source into 
compliance. The reporting requirements section is consistent with EPA's 
model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations and is 
therefore approvable.

8-11-10  Provisions for Sources Electing To Use Emissions Averaging

    This section provides that sources electing a program to comply 
with the emission standard via averaging equations need to submit to 
IDEM, a plan addressing the following provisions detailed in the rule: 
Program goals and rationale; program scope; for program baseline, each 
finishing material included in the averaging program shall be the lower 
of the actual or allowable emission rate as of the effective date of 
this rule; quantification procedures; and monitoring, record keeping, 
and reporting. In addition, this section states that pending approval 
by IDEM and EPA of a proposed emissions averaging plan, the source is 
to continue to comply with the provisions of the rule. The provisions 
for sources electing to use emissions averaging section is consistent 
with EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning 
operations and is therefore approvable.

Enforcement

    The Indiana Code (IC) 13-7-13-1, states that any person who 
violates any provision of IC 13-1-1, IC 13-1-3, or IC 13-1-11, or any 
regulation or standard adopted by one of the boards (i.e., Indiana Air 
Pollution Control Board), or who violates any determination, permit, or 
order made or issued by the commissioner (of Indiana Department of 
Environmental Management) pursuant to IC 13-1-1, or IC 13-1-3, is 
liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars 
per day of any violation. Because this submittal is a regulation 
adopted by the IAPCB, a violation of which subjects the violator to 
penalties under IC 13-7-13-1, and because a violation of the ozone SIP 
would also subject a violator to enforcement under section 113 of the 
Act by EPA, EPA finds that the submittal contains sufficient 
enforcement penalties for approval. In addition, IDEM has submitted a 
civil penalty policy document which accounts for various factors in the 
assessment of an appropriate civil penalty for noncompliance with IAPCB 
rules, among them, the severity of the violation, intent of the 
violator, and frequency of violations. EPA finds these criteria 
sufficient to deter non-compliance and is therefore approvable.

III. Final Rulemaking Action

    Indiana's rules for wood furniture finishing and cleaning 
operations are generally consistent with EPA's guidance in the Act for 
this category and are therefore considered to constitute RACT. EPA 
therefore approves these rules in 326 Indiana Air Code (IAC) 8-11 that 
were submitted on November 21, 1995, and February 14, 1996.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates 
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal 
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be 
effective December 30, 1996 unless, by November 29, 1996, adverse or 
critical comments are received.
    If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn 
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should 
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is 
advised that this action will be effective December 30, 1996.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the 
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, the 
Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on 
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the 
Federal-State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a flexibility 
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base 
its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. 
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must undertake various actions 
in association with any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal 
mandate that may result in estimated costs to state, local, or tribal 
governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million 
or more. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under 
state or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. 
Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or tribal 
governments, or the private sector, result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report 
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the 
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United

[[Page 55894]]

States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 30, 
1996. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of 
this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the 
purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a 
petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the 
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged 
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 
307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 5, 1996.
William E. Muno,
Acting Regional Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(114) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.770  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (114) On November 21, 1995, and February 14, 1996, Indiana 
submitted regulations for wood furniture coating operations in Clark, 
Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties as a revision to the State 
Implementation Plan for ozone.
    (i) Incorporation by reference. 326 Indiana Administrative Code 8-
11 Wood Furniture Coatings, Section 1 Applicability, Section 2 
Definitions, Section 3 Emission limits, Section 4 Work practice 
standards, Section 5 Continuous compliance plan, Section 6 Compliance 
procedures and monitoring requirements, Section 7 Test procedures, 
Section 8 Recordkeeping requirements, Section 9 Reporting requirements, 
Section 10 Provisions for sources electing to use emission averaging. 
Adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board May 3, 1995. Filed 
with the Secretary of State December 5, 1996. Published at Indiana 
Register, Volume 19, Number 5, February 1, 1996. Effective January 4, 
1996.

[FR Doc. 96-27607 Filed 10-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P